quote:

---

Originally posted by legalbear
I am of the opinion that we are in the last days of the latter days. I think the "last days" started when Jahshuwah came on the scene as a man and have continued for the last 2000 or so years. In Acts 2:

quote:

---

14But Peter, standing with the eleven, raised his voice and addressed them: You Jews and all you residents of Jerusalem, let this be [explained] to you so that you will know and understand; listen closely to what I have to say.

15For these men are not drunk, as you imagine, for it is [only] the third hour (about 9:00 a.m.) of the day;

16But [instead] this is [the beginning of] what was spoken through the prophet Joel:

17And it shall come to pass in the last days, Jahuwah declares, that I will pour out of My Spirit upon all mankind, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy [telling forth the divine counsels] and your young men shall see visions (divinely granted appearances), and your old men shall dream [divinely suggested] dreams.

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by legalbear
I am also of the opinion that the latter days also have to do with the scattering of Judah and what remained of Israel in 70 AD based on Deut. 4:

quote:

---

27And Jahuwah will scatter you among the peoples, and you will be left few in number among the nations to which Jahuwah will drive you.

28There you will serve gods, the work of men's hands, wood and stone, which neither see nor hear nor eat nor smell.

29But if from there you will seek (inquire for and require as necessity) Jahuwah your Mighty Creator, you will find Him if you [truly] seek Him with all your heart [and mind] and soul and life.

30When you are in tribulation and all these things come upon you, in the latter days you will turn to Jahuwah your Mighty Creator and be obedient to His voice.

---

---

quote:

---

Mt 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

---

quote:

---

Dear Suitors;





Gregory Duane reminded me about the foundational premises we suitors stand upon for developing our authority to be ‘courts of competent jurisdiction’.* He did this through a couple important points; 1) http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdslirs.htm ^ and 2) by quoting from Section 6323 of the IRC, “…court. In the office of the clerk of the United States district court” about administrative process acceptable to file with the County Clerk and Recorder. (Also see http://www.svpvril.com/dmjuristic.html )



The key to understanding our posture for Refusal for Cause dwells within “Administrative Government” and “Judicial Review”. American Jurisprudence – Administrative Government reveals the only authority in administrative process is judicial review. “Voluntary” consent to the abrogation of the Constitutional ‘checks and balances’ – administrative process, can only be found in the immediate ability to call in judicial review of the abrogated checks and balances.



So early on, I designed the counterclaims around Rule C(3)(a)(ii)(B), the right to execute arrest for certifying that ‘judicial review’ was in your competent opinion, impracticable; Certificate of Exigent Circumstances.



Greg also spent a few precious hours (‘precious’ amplified by him preparing for his daughter’s wedding at the same time dealing with a seizure of his land) with deputy clerk Diedra in Des Moines. Both visits brought to light that Diedra agreed the wording of Rule C said plainly “the clerk must immediately issue a warrant” in both spirit and fact. However, Diedra was under orders and it would probably lose her job to issue the warrant for Gregory Duane, the “plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney” in the Rule. In counseling Greg I have also formulated a system that may work. At least it looks good in theory.



If you are being victimized attempt to have the signor for the Secretary or the Secretary John Snow arrested. So far this is met with the same reluctance by the clerk. A few of you have already had your Certificates ignored. So you already have accomplished the first step. The second step is to sue the district court clerk for ‘breach of contract’, or malfeasance of office. Get the deputy's name like Greg with Diedra for a witness. On the stand it will almost certainly be disclosed that the clerk being sued instructed the deputy not to execute the arrest according to the Contract, Rule C(3)(a)(ii)(B).



Since there are gold admiralty fringes in the County courts, you may enter filing under Rule E(8) Restricted Appearance. This limits the matter to the contract or claim expressly notified. Your claim is that the clerk has notified you by publication F.R.C.P. and the Supplemental Rules that he would be executing arrests for you. There is no mention that a judge would be abrogating the clerk’s authority to do so. One could file in County Court. The presumption would exist that you are pro se but it is obvious you are a man or woman. By keeping the issue simple, the false pro se branding would be minimized. There is risk that a counterclaim might be honored by the jury but weigh that not only to your own property loss but by what effect that has on greater common law and society by allowing it to happen.



In County Court there is a good chance the State would honor your 7th Amendment right to a trial before a jury. At that trial you might have a chance to pursuade the panel that the clerk did not follow the Rule and it cost you. Damages might be awarded. Even punitive and exemplary damages would be considered by a jury.



It might be tempting to bring into the light the recent judgment against John Snow. But I implore you not to "open any doors". By keeping the issue to your right of arrest and to take responsibility for an arrest, clearly expressed by Rule C, you can mitigate the sophistry the Treasury lawyers will attempt to use to dazzle the jury. Greg will definitely keep things simple. One key witness who will likely under oath, disclose that she would arrest the culprits according to Rule C, but the clerk Donald Cinnamond will not allow her to. That might be persuasive in front of a jury.



Also, by multiple cases summoning the clerks in Denver, Des Moines and elsewhere, pressure to execute arrests may have some effect to that end. Maybe we can get a Treasury agent or the Secretary in cuffs.





Regards,



David Merrill.



* Authority always rides a fidelity bond. Ours rides the bill of exchange that cured September 11, 2001 against the original estate. But there is a bonding in place, so I hear, for clerks. It would be good to sue against this bond so see if you can get more information. However, it is not crucial because we may presume the bond exists and if it does not, there is no authority and the clerk is personally exposed to suit.



^ Greg brought up a very important point – that there is no notary seal as required by the Code on the processes by which agents have laid a ‘seizure’ to his farm land. I believe that there is always a fault in process and by not R4C or calling for judicial review of the fault, we are presumed to be in ‘voluntary compliance’ with the abrogated or administrative processes, forfeiture of our claim. For instance, since Greg has been R4C all proper notifications, the agents are pounding on his door (faulty paper process). But also, this sets Greg up with the right of arrest through Rule C. If your case has been closed or dismissed then you are set up too.





P.S. I have attached the memorandum of law for confidence that revenue processes are admiralty. Also attached is a generic Certificate of Exigent Circumstances.

[Links here soon]


I am available to help you with details by commission but point out that the less I do the better as I implore you to keep it so simple you will not need me. File on simple breach of contract by the district court clerk.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cornerstone Foundation
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:

We have been told that perhaps it is appropriate to ask the question..."latter days of which age"?whenever one sees the term latter days or last daysin the Scriptures.

The reason for this is that the Scriptures indicate that there have been and perhaps will be many ages.

If there are many ages it follows that each of these ages(except perhaps the final age) must have latter days and last days .

Therefore we feel it is appropriate to ask "last or latter days of which age?"

Thank you for considering this.

Marty

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by David Merrill

However, a lot of the symptoms linger in Futurism - anticipation of a supernatural Second Advent of the Messiah to usher in the Messianic Age.

---